BABU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE alleged murder of Arjun Singh, the testimonies of his mother and wife have brought the appellants before this Court. They are challenging the judgment dated 26-9-2001, passed by the additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), hindaun whereby the learned Judge has convicted the appellant No. 1, Babu Lal for offence under Section 302, I. P. C. and has sentenced him to life imprisonment and has imposed a fine of Rs. 500/- and to further undergo a rigorous imprisonment of two months in default thereof. The learned judge has convicted appellant No. 2, ghanshyam of offence under Section 326, i. P. C. and has sentenced him to five years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 300/- and to further undergo a sentence of two months in default thereof.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, on 14-1-2000, one Vijay Singh lodged a written report (Ex. P. 7) at Police Station Hindaun city wherein he alleged, "on 13-1-2000 around 7. 00 p. m. , his elder brother, Arjun singh was returning back home from the village. As soon as he reached near the handpump of the village, Babu Lal, Ghanshyam, battu s/o. Dalev, and the wives of Babu Lal and Battu surrounded him. . Babu Lal struck him with a sword and Ghanshyam hit him with an axe, the others assaulted him with "lathis" (bamboo sticks ). Consequently, his brother, Arjun Singh expired on the spot. Arjun's mother, Mukti, tried to save her son. These persons also assaulted her. I, Arjun singh's wife, Indra, my wife Kamlesh and bharosi Jatt have witnessed this incident. The dead body of my brother is lying in the village. Since the night had begun and since there was no means of transportation, we could not lodge the report". On the basis of the said report, a formal FIR, FIR No. 35/ 2000 (Ex. P. 8) was chalked out for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323 and 302, I. P. C. After the investigation, the charge sheet was filed against all the named accused persons for offences under Sections 148, 323, 302, 323/149 and 302/149, I. P. C. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses and submitted twenty-three documents. The accused persons did not examine any witness in their defense. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Judge convicted the appellants as mentioned above. But, the learned Judge acquitted battu, Mst. Kastoori, and Mst. Chanti of the charges. Thus, this appeal before this Court.

(3.) MR. Sangram Singh for Mr. V. S. Chauhan, the learned counsel for the appellants has raised various contentions before this Court firstly, there is no motive for the alleged murder. The motive assigned by the prosecution, that there was some dispute between the parties over the land is unacceptable. For, the dispute over the land was an old one. Thus, it could not have provided the spark for the alleged crime. Secondly, there is contradiction between the ocular evidence of the alleged eye-witness and the medical evidence. Hence, the eyewitness cannot be believed. Thirdly, the star witness, P. W. 7, Mukti, is the mother of the deceased. Therefore, she is an interested witness. Other evidence has not corroborated her testimony. In fact, it has contradicted her testimony. Hence, she is an unreliable witness. Fourthly, Vijay Singh, the complainant, has turned hostile. Therefore, the entire prosecution looses its validity. Fifthly, similarly, Arjun Singh's wife was alleged to be an eye witness. Yet, in her testimony she clearly admits that by the time she reached the scene of the crime, Arjun Singh had already died. Sixthly, the other independent witnesses, P. W. 5-Kamlesh, and P. W. 9-Bharosi. have not supported the case of the prosecution. They have been declared hostile. Lastly, on the basis of the same evidence, three co accused persons have been acquitted, while the present appellants have been convicted for two different offences. Hence, the prosecution case is replete with lacunae and doubts.